[governance] Position by IT for Change and some other NGOs on enhanced cooperation
parminder
parminder at itforchange.net
Wed Aug 28 06:53:06 EDT 2013
Dear All
IT for Change and some other NGOs plan to forward the following position
to the UN Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation. Preceding the position
statement is a covering letter seeking support. You are /*welcome to
support this position any time before 12 noon GMT on 31st Aug*/. We are
happy to provide any additional information/ clarification etc. Also
happy to otherwise discuss this position, and its different elements. We
are motivated by the need to come up with precise and clear
institutional options at this stage. Politics of inertia and not doing
anything just serves the status quo. These may not be the best
institutional options, and we are ready to enter into discussion with
other groups on what instead would be the better options. But, again,
not doing anything is, in our opinion, would be detrimental to global
public interest.
The web link to this position is at
http://www.itforchange.net/civil_society_input_to_the_UN_Working_Group_for_global_governance_of_the_Internet
.
parminder
/*Covering letter / Background
*/
In May 2012, more than 60 civil society organisations and several
individuals participated in a campaign for 'democratising the global
governance of the Internet
<http://www.itforchange.net/civil_society_statement_on_democratic_internet>'.
A joint letter signed by the participants of this campaign /inter alia/
asked for setting up a UN Working Group towards this objective. Such a
Working Group was set up and has now asked for public inputs to
formulate its recommendations.
In our joint letter, we had proposed some outlines for reforming the
current global governance architecture of the Internet. Time has come
now to make more clear and specific recommendations of the actual
institutional mechanism that we need. With most governments more worried
about their narrow geopolitical interests and relationships with
individual countries, it falls upon the civil society to be bold and
forward looking and put precise proposals on the table that can then be
taken forward by state actors.
In a post-Snowden world, there is deep discomfort among almost all
countries, other than the US, with the manner in which the global
Internet is run and is evolving. The need for some global norms,
principles, rules, and necessary governance mechanisms for the global
Internet is being felt now as never before. The Internet can no longer
remain anchored to the political and business interests of one country,
or to serving global capital, as it is at present. As a global commons,
it is our collective democratic right and responsibility to participate
in the governance of the Internet, so that it can become a vehicle for
greater prosperity, equity and social justice for all.
We seek your support to join us in proposing the enclosed document as an
input to the Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation. The Working Group
has sought public inputs through a questionnaire which can be seen at
http://unctad.org/en/Pages/CSTD.aspx . The most important question is at
number 8, which seeks input with regard to precise mechanism(s) that are
required. Our response will mostly address this all-important question.
(You are also encouraged to, separately, give a fuller response to the
questionnaire on your behalf or on behalf of your organization.) We will
also like to give wide media publicity to this civil society statement .
We will be glad if you can send your response to us /*before the 30th of
August*/. We are of course happy to respond to any clarification or
additional information that you may want to seek in the above regard.
Please also circulate this to others who you think may want to
participate in this initiative. The global Internet governance space
seems to be dominated by those who push for neoliberal models of
governance. We must therefore have as many voices heard as possible.
(The statement is cut pasted below this email and may also be seen here
<http://www.itforchange.net/civil_society_input_to_the_UN_Working_Group_for_global_governance_of_the_Internet>
)
With best regard,
Parminder
*Parminder Jeet Singh*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IT for Change
In special consultative status with the United Nations ECOSOC
www.ITforChange.net <http://www.itforchange.net/>
T: 00-91-80-26654134| T: 00-91-80-26536890| Fax: 00-91-80-41461055
/_*A civil society input to the UN Working Group looking at *_/
/_*institutional mechanisms for global governance of the Internet *_/
/(Please write to itfc <mailto:manasa at itforchange.net>@itforchange.net
<mailto:manasa at itforchange.net> before 29th Aug if you will like to
endorse this statement)**/
/*
Why global governance of the Internet?*/
Internet governance is seen largely in terms of national sovereignty and
security or as pertaining to free speech and privacy. We are of the view
that there exist many other equally important issues for global Internet
governance that arise from the whole gamut of rights and aspirations of
people – social, economic, cultural, political and developmental. The
relationship of the global Internet to cultural diversity is one
example. The Internet increasingly determines not only the global flows
of information but also of cultures, and their commodification. No
social process is exempt from the influence of the Internet – from
education to health and governance. Social systems at national and local
levels are being transformed under the influence of the global Internet.
Instead of decentralizing power, the current structure of the global
Internet tends to centralize control in the hands of a small number of
companies. Some of these companies have near-monopoly power over key
areas of economic and social significance. Therefore, regulation of
global Internet business through pertinent competition law, consumer
law, open interoperability standards, etc, is becoming a pressing need.
Increasing statist controls need to be similarly resisted. With the
emergent paradigm of cloud computing presenting the looming prospect of
remote management of our digital lives from different 'power centres'
across the world, it is inconceivable that we can do without appropriate
democratic governance of the global Internet. Post-Snowden, as many
countries have begun to contemplate and even embark upon measures for
'digital sovereignty', the only way to preserve a /global//**/Internet
is through formulating appropriate /global/ norms, principles and rules
that will underpin its governance.
/*Background of this civil society input*/
A group of over 60 civil society organizations and several individuals,
made a statement on /'Democratizing the global governance of the
Internet
<http://www.itforchange.net/civil_society_statement_on_democratic_internet>'/
to the open consultations on 'enhanced cooperation'^1
<mailbox:///home/param/.thunderbird/g5alewyg.param/mail/Unsent%20Messages?number=30236899#sdfootnote1sym>
called by the Chair of the UN Commission on Science and Technology for
Development (CSTD) on May 18th, 2012, in Geneva. The statement /inter
alia/ sought the setting up of a CSTD Working Group to address this
issue. We are happy to note that such a Working Group has been set up
and has now called for public inputs to make its recommendations. This
document is an input to the Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation (WGEC)
on the behalf of the undersigned .
In the aforementioned statement
<http://www.itforchange.net/civil_society_statement_on_democratic_internet>
of May 2012, the civil society signatories had called for the following
institutional developments to take place in the global Internet
governance architecture:
/Our demands with respect to 'global' Internet Governance espouse a
simple and obvious democratic logic. On the technical governance side,
the oversight of the Internet's critical technical and logical
infrastructure, at present with the US government, should be transferred
to an appropriate, democratic and participative, multi-lateral body,
without disturbing the existing distributed architecture of technical
governance of the Internet in any significant way. (However,
improvements in the technical governance systems are certainly needed.)
On the side of larger Internet related public policy-making on global
social, economic, cultural and political issues, the OECD-based model of
global policy making, as well as the default application of US laws,
should be replaced by a new UN-based democratic mechanism. Any such new
arrangement should be based on the principle of subsidiarity, and be
innovative in terms of its mandate, structure, and functions, to be
adequate to the unique requirements of global Internet governance. It
must be fully participative of all stakeholders, promoting the
democratic and innovative potential of the//Internet. /
As the WGEC deliberates on concrete ways to move forward, the time is
ripe to propose clear and specific institutional mechanisms for
democratizing the global governance of the Internet. We have, therefore,
expanded the above demands into specific mechanisms that should be set
in place for this purpose.
/*New global governance mechanisms are needed*/
We are of the view that it would be useful to have two distinct
mechanisms – one that looks at the global Internet-related public
policy issues in various social, economic, cultural and political
domains, and another that should undertake oversight of the technical
and operational functions related to the Internet (basically, replacing
the current unilateral oversight of the ICANN^2
<mailbox:///home/param/.thunderbird/g5alewyg.param/mail/Unsent%20Messages?number=30236899#sdfootnote2sym>
by the US government). This will require setting up appropriate new
global governance bodies as well as a framework of international law to
facilitate their work, as follows.
/*A new UN body for Internet-related public policy issues:*//**/ An
anchor global institution for taking up and addressing various public
policy issues pertaining to the Internet in an ongoing manner is
urgently required. It can be a committee attached to the UN General
Assemblyor a more elaborate and relatively autonomous set up linked
loosely to the UN (as a specialized UN body). It should have a very
strong and institutionalized public consultative mechanism, in the form
of stakeholder advisory groups that are selected through formal
processes by different stakeholder constituencies, ensuring adequate
representativeness. (OECD's /Committee on Computer, Information and
Communication Policy/ <http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/18/39/37328586.pdf>
and India's recent proposal for a /UN/
<http://itforchange.net/Techgovernance/IndiaCIRP><http://itforchange.net/Techgovernance/IndiaCIRP>/Committee
on Internet-related Policies/
<http://itforchange.net/Techgovernance/IndiaCIRP><http://itforchange.net/Techgovernance/IndiaCIRP>are
two useful, and somewhat similar, models that can be looked at.)
This 'new body' will stay abreast of global Internet-related issues;
where necessary, develop international level public policies in the
concerned areas; seek appropriate harmonization of national level
policies, and; facilitate required treaties, conventions and agreements.
It will also have the necessary means to undertake studies and present
analyses in different policy areas.
Most Internet-related public policy issues are of a cross-cutting
nature, and involve overlaps with mandates of other existing global
governance bodies, like WIPO, UNESCO, WTO, UNDP, UNCTAD, ITU and so on.
Due to this reason, the proposed new 'body' will establish appropriate
relationships with all these other existing bodies, including directing
relevant public policy issues to them, receiving their inputs and
comments, and itself contributing specific Internet-related perspectives
to issues under the purview of these other bodies.
/*A new 'Internet Technical Oversight and Advisory Board':*/ This board
will replace the US government's current oversight role over the
technical and operational functions performed by ICANN. The membership
of this oversight board can be of a techno-political nature,
/i.e./consisting of people with specialized expertise but who also have
appropriate political backing, ascertained through a democratic process.
For instance, the board can be made of 10/15 members, with 2/3 members
each from five geographic regions (as understood in the UN system).
These members can perhaps be selected through an appropriate process by
the relevant technical standards bodies and/or country domain name
bodies of all the countries of the respective region. (Other mechanisms
for constituting the techno-political membership of this board can also
be considered.)
The Internet technical oversight and advisory board will seek to ensure
that the various technical and operational functions related to the
global Internet are undertaken by the relevant organizations as per
international law and public policy principles developed by the
concerned international bodies. With regard to ICANN, the role of this
board will more or less be exactly the same as exercised by the US
government in its oversight over ICANN. As for the decentralized
Internet standards development mechanisms, like the Internet Engineering
Task Force, these self organizing systems based on voluntary adoption of
standards will continue to work as at present. The new board will have a
very light touch and non-binding role with regard to them. It will bring
in imperatives from, and advise these technical standards bodies on,
international public policies, international law and norms being
developed by various relevant bodies.
For this board to be able to fulfill its oversight mandate, ICANN must
become an international organization, without changing its existing
multistakeholder character in any substantial manner. It would enter
into a host country agreement with the US government (if ICANN has to
continue to be headquartered in the US). It would have full immunity
from US law and executive authority, and be guided solely by
international law, and be incorporated under it. Supervision of the
authoritative root zone server must also be transferred to this
oversight broad. The board will exercise this role with the help of an
internationalized ICANN.
This board will also advise the afore-mentioned new public policy body
on technical matters pertaining to the Internet policy making, as well
as take public policy inputs from it.
/*Framework Convention on the Internet:*//**/An appropriate
international legal framework will be required sooner than later for the
above bodies to function properly. Accordingly, one of the early tasks
of the proposed 'new body' dealing with Internet-related public policy
issues, discussed above, will be to help negotiate a 'Framework
Convention on the Internet' (somewhat like the /Framework Convention on
Climate Change
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Framework_Convention_on_Climate_Change>)/.
Governance of the Internet concerns different kinds of issues that are
ever-evolving. It is, therefore, preferable to formulate an enabling
legal structure as a 'framework convention' rather than as a specific
treaty or convention that addresses only a bounded set of issues. It may
also be easier to initially agree to a series of principles, protocols
and processes that can then frame further agreements, treaties etc on
more specific issues.
Such a Framework Convention will thus enable appropriate and ongoing
global policy responses to various opportunities and challenges that the
fast-evolving phenomenon of the Internet throws up. It will also
formalize the basic architecture of the global governance of the
Internet; /inter alia/ recognizing and legitimizing the existing role
and functions of the various bodies currently involved with managing the
technical and logical infrastructure of the Internet, including the
ICANN, Regional Internet Registries, Internet technical standards bodies
and so on.
Appropriate mechanisms for crisis response and dispute resolution in
relation to the global Internet, and the social activity dependent on
it, will also be required to be set up.
/*Relationship with the IGF*/
The UN Internet Governance Forum (IGF) was established as a
multistakeholder 'policy dialogue forum' by the World Summit on the
Information Society. The proposed global Internet policy mechanism,
especially the new UN based body, will maintain a close relationship
with the IGF. IGF affords a very new kind of participative mechanism for
policy making, whereby the participation realm is institutionalized, and
relatively independent of the policy making structures. The IGF should
preferably pre-discuss issues that are taken up by this new policy body
and present diverse perspectives for its consideration. A good part of
the agenda for this new body can emerge from the IGF. Whenever possible,
draft proposals to be adopted by this new body should be shared with the
IGF.
To perform such a participation enhancing role, the IGF must be
adequately strengthened and reformed, especially to address the
dominance of Northern corporatist interests in its current working. It
must be supported with public funds, and insulated from any funding
system that can bring in perverse influences on its agenda and outcomes.
Other required processes must also be put in place to ensure that the
IGF indeed brings in constituencies that are typically
under-represented, rather than provide further political clout to the
already dominant.
A participative body is only as good as the policy making mechanisms
that feed off it. To that extent, the meaningfulness and effectiveness
of the IGF itself requires a strong policy development mechanism, as
suggested in this document, to be linked to it. Investing in the IGF is
useful only if its outputs and contributions lead to something concrete.
/*Funding*/
An innovative way to fund the proposed new global Internet policy
mechanisms, and also the IGF, is to tap into the collections made by the
relevant bodies from allocation of names and numbers resources
pertaining to the global Internet (like the fee that ICANN collects
annually from each domain name owner). These accruals now run into
millions of dollars every year and could be adequate to fund a large
part of the needed mechanisms for democratic governance of the global
Internet.
In the end, we may add that there is nothing really very novel in the
above proposal for setting up new mechanisms for global governance of
the Internet. Similar models, for instance, were proposed in the report
of the Working Group on Internet Governance that was set up during the
World Summit on the Information Society, back in 2004.
We hope that the Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation will fulfill its
high mandate to lead the world towards the path of democratic governance
of the global commons of the Internet.
1
<mailbox:///home/param/.thunderbird/g5alewyg.param/mail/Unsent%20Messages?number=30236899#sdfootnote1anc>The
outcome documents of the World Summit on the Information Society, held
in 2005, employed this as a placeholder term giving the mandate for
further exploration of the necessary mechanisms for global governance of
the Internet.
2
<mailbox:///home/param/.thunderbird/g5alewyg.param/mail/Unsent%20Messages?number=30236899#sdfootnote2anc>Internet
Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, the US based non-profit that
manages much of technical and logical infrastructural functions related
to the Internet.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130828/835e023a/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
For all other list information and functions, see:
http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
http://www.igcaucus.org/
Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
More information about the Governance
mailing list